For this post, I want to talk about the the nature of Web-based publishing and the way it has changed (and will continue to change) how knowledge is created and shared.
I have been thinking about this for some time and make no claims to be an expert, but I hope I can provide a few useful insights.
So what makes publishing on the Web different than traditional print publishing?
I have boiled it down to 8 multi-faceted “characteristics” and 1 somewhat tongue-in-cheek acronym:
- Continuous (chronogically-speaking)
- Revisable
- Evolving
- Distributed (and democratic?)
- Individualized (as well as format-Indifferent)
- Blendable
- Linkable (and …)
- Emergent
In short, Web communication is C R E D I B L E.
So, why do I think so?
Keep reading and you will see. (Beware, this may end up being a two-parter.)
Continuous
First of all, the nature of Web publishing is continuous - at least chronogically-speaking.
Whether daily, weekly, or monthly, traditional print publishers have always had to put out their information in short “bursts” rather than in a steady stream.
An author writes a piece. A newspaper breaks a story. But, in the print realm, they all still have to wait until the next issue to let their readers or audience know.
Not so on the Web. You can publish a new story, article, or tidbit of information whenever you want. Whether a blog post, a tweet, or a NYT article, the time of “posting” may be recorded, but it is no longer tied to a set publication schedule.
This continuous flow of data, facts, and commentary has served to make the Web more closely resemble television as a communication medium — serving up various “information channels” that the user can browse, sort, or filter at their discretion.
This trend will no doubt grow even more pronounced in the future, as Web producers continue to “live blog” conference meetings and journalists post updates on events as they happen to various newswire services.
How far are we from seeing Web authors creating useful content in real-time right before our eyes - much like embedded journalist reporting live from the front?
Revisable
In addition to being published continuously, Web publications also hold the honor of being instantly revisable.
Unlike published materials, which must wait until the next issue to print a retraction or provide further updates on a story, web publications can post updates, corrections, or additional information at any time.
Furthermore, these various Web “editions” can be tracked and revisions kept indefinitely to record the provenance of a particular piece of content, while still allowing it to grow and be updated continuously.
This carries a number of advantages, including transparency in content-creation in many cases, but I will move on.
Evolving
Of course, because of content is instantly revisable, it also is no longer static but constantly evolving. Wikipedia specifically, and wikis generally, are the most obvious example of this capability.
Rather than remaining relatively static storehouses of knowledge, they constantly grow and change, improving their content — or at least expanding the scope of their content — every day.
Distributed (and perhaps more Democratic?)
Speaking of Wikipedia, of course, we have yet to talk about the benefits of mass collaboration on the Web (so called Wikinomics).
Obviously, Wikipedia has shown that when millions of people get together their collective knowledge can often produce high-quality content among other unexpected benefits.
However, collaboration is just one example of the way that authorship and content creation is becoming increasingly distributed online.
If you look at social communication on the Web - blogs, microblogs, lifestreaming sites, etc. - the Web is also seeing a surge in the growth of distributed conversations.
Take a popular blog post, for instance: it may be written by a single author, but it also might receive dozens or even hundreds of reader comments.
Some of these comments may be insightful enough to represent useful content themselves. Others may provoke a response from the author, allowing her to clarify or revise her argument. Both blur the boundaries of what makes up an article or topic.
Someone may also respond to a blog post using their own blog, creating a virtual discussion (or community) of sorts across the blogosphere..
And if that was not enough, readers still have the option of “sharing” a post with their friends via Google Reader, del.icio.us, Digg, Twitter, etc.
All of this social activity has come to represent a kind of sprawling network of content and commentary that has no clear borders. (Standards such as SIOC seek to knit some of these disparate elements together, but as yet, has not gained much traction.)
This distributed form of publication also empowers individuals to be part of reporting the news and may lead to further “democratization” of the press.
While there is still some debate as to what degree this happened or will happen, it no doubt makes public involvement in publishing and journalism possible like no medium ever has before.
Next time: I B L E